Bita and Pieces

[cactusjumper]

Thomas,

As long as what you write is the product of your own research, I accept what you say.....without question.

Take care,

Joe

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Azhiker]

Matthew,

Thank you for sending the info I requested in my PM to you. I see now what you are talking about and you are 100% correct.
I also noted the agreement between Willey and Morrow doesnt say Willey will write the book, it clearly says he will undertake and collaborate the effort. A big difference.
As Treasurer of Morrow he oversaw the entire book process including choosing the ghostwriter who actually undertook the rewrite. It just proves you cannot interpret everything literally and use your own interpretation of the words undertake and collaborate to fit what you think they should. Good work looking beyond the first layer for the real story.

Azhiker

 

[Garry]

Dr. Glover,

I was able to get hold of an audio file of the presentation you delivered at the Rendezvous regarding the Sims Ely book, “The Lost Dutchman Mine,” and it answered a lot of my questions. Your inputs in this thread have further clarified the circumstances and I’m sure your book will continue to enlighten.

You deserve congratulations on running all of this primary information to ground and the Ely family deserves our thanks for opening up these papers to the public. (The actual document images will be exciting for me!)

It’s hard to overstate the impact of Ely's book on the LDM story. For 60 years it has been touted as a primary resource for treasure hunters and it served to introduce countless individuals to the LDM story.

Doug Stewart and his web site is the go to place for LDM book reviews and I have just finished reading his notes on Ely’s book. I suspect that when all of the new information becomes available, he will have to sit down and rewrite what many have believed for 60 years.

Drawing back the curtain on the actual history is something everyone "should" appreciate (Not all will!). There has been speculation on the forums that the reason Ely got a lot of stuff wrong was because he didn’t have all his faculties, was too old, etc. That line of reasoning now should be put to rest.

While I was never a particular fan of the book (too many demonstrable errors) I certainly did not have any concept of the "why" there were errors. I think now at least, many of them can be explained.

On the other hand, I am a Jim Bark Notes fan and you indicated that his initial objective was to get his notes published and no one was interested.

You also wrote:

"The Ely family had multiple copies of the Bark notes by 1932/33."

I am trying to read between the lines here which is always dangerous. Have these multiple copies been extensively edited? In other words has the first account been changed over time to and improve the chance for obtaining a publisher?

The bottom line for me is that I would like to be working with the “first” unadulterated version before it began to be altered. It may be that Bark was just adding some things like an updated version of the Adolph Ruth story (1932), etc. and he wasn’t messing with the other stories and his later versions are basically the same?

I have one copy of Bark’s notes where they continually refer to the “Half” Circle Ranch, which I don’t understand at all. It doesn’t sound like it came from Bark?

OK, I had to look up “parsimony” and the meaning of “So long and thanks for all the fish!”

Garry

 

[Oroblanco]

TEGlover wrote

Years ago I tried venturing into/on to a forum such as this and quickly became disillusioned. Another hiatus is in order.

I hope we can talk you out of that - in any large group there are always a few that are difficult to get along with, thankfully in this venue we have the "ignore" button for those folks. Thank you again for sharing your research, very informative posts; I hope you will continue to talk with us here.

Garry wrote

Doug Stewart and his web site is the go to place for LDM book reviews and I have just finished reading his notes on Ely’s book. I suspect that when all of the new information becomes available, he will have to sit down and rewrite what many have believed for 60 years.

In defense of Ely's <and Willey's> book, in comparison with some of the books available, how would you rank it? Thank you in advance.

Oroblanco

 

[cactusjumper]

Roy,

For me, Ely is still near the top of the LDM food chain. I put Dr. Glover at the top for many years. Unfortunately he, like a few others had one source who was not the best. Not his fault, as you go many times with the "generally accepted" best source.

Garry may have another opinion, just thought I would add mine. On the other hand, I consider you and Beth excellent sources for just about.......anything.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Roy,

For me, Ely is still near the top of the LDM food chain. I put Dr. Glover at the top for many years. Unfortunately he, like a few others had one source who was not the best. Not his fault, as you go many times with the "generally accepted" best source.

Garry may have another opinion, just thought I would add mine. On the other hand, I consider you and Beth excellent sources for just about.......anything.

Take care,

Joe

I take it that last part was tongue-in-cheek! I can name a lost mine which I plan to hunt for this summer, on which the only sources we have are the (almost) worst imaginable. You have given me an idea however, and I agree about Ely's book, it is still in the top ranks in my opinion as well if for no other reason than having had Ely's input, and possibly the use of the Bark notes. Dr Glover's books are also in the top ranks in my view as well.

Roy ~ Oroblanco

 

[cactusjumper]

I take it that last part was tongue-in-cheek! I can name a lost mine which I plan to hunt for this summer, on which the only sources we have are the (almost) worst imaginable. You have given me an idea however, and I agree about Ely's book, it is still in the top ranks in my opinion as well if for no other reason than having had Ely's input, and possibly the use of the Bark notes. Dr Glover's books are also in the top ranks in my view as well.

Roy ~ Oroblanco

Roy,

Quite the contrary. There was absolutely no "tongue-in-cheek" implied or even considered. While we don't always agree, I have great respect for both of you, as well as your opinions. Extensive research is the key.......

Take care,

Joe

 

[ConceptualizedNetherlandr]

I take it that last part was tongue-in-cheek! I can name a lost mine which I plan to hunt for this summer, on which the only sources we have are the (almost) worst imaginable. You have given me an idea however, and I agree about Ely's book, it is still in the top ranks in my opinion as well if for no other reason than having had Ely's input, and possibly the use of the Bark notes. Dr Glover's books are also in the top ranks in my view as well.

Roy ~ Oroblanco

So tell us about this mine

 

[Oroblanco]

So tell us about this mine

No worries amigo - it is not in Arizona if that is what you are thinking, I live in South Dakota, and this one is in my "backyard" area. It would be VERY off-topic and should be in its own thread, not here - however I did post something about it on my personal blog if you are curious;
The Lost Cabin Mine -(s)- | Oroblanco's New Cabin

If however you are hoping for solid documentation as is so often sought concerning the Lost Dutchman, forget it - the sources on these lost mines fall into that "next to worst" category in the opinion of most here.

Sorry for the off-topic post Dr Glover.
Oroblanco

 

[ConceptualizedNetherlandr]

The road goes on forever and the party never ends

 

[TEGlover]

Gentlemen:

I am not getting involved with this mess again. I had thought people deserved to know about the authorship of Sims Ely’s book, and the implications thereof. The scenario I have put forth is supported by the letters I have, e.g. the one I published on the forum. Further, it is acknowledged by the Ely family as what transpired. And it is supported by interviews Jerry Hamrick had with John C. Willey.

However, as there appeared to be some research that indicated otherwise, i.e., that John Wiley and Son were involved I wrote them asking if they had been. I laid out the Ely book was published by William Morrow and Co., that their officer John Willey was involved; however, statements had arisen suggesting that John Wiley and Sons Inc. was also involved with the Ely book. Their reply in total is below:

“May 1, 2014

Thank you for your letter of April 25 concerning the involvement of a John C. Wiley in the work “The Lost Dutchman Mine.” I think we can say with confidence that there is no association between John C. Wiley and [the] Wiley family or company.

If you have firther questions, please feel free to write to me again.

Sincerely,

John”

What agenda others may have is not my concern. My interest in the Dutchman has be multifaceted—focused on trying to understand its history, the history of the times and how that may have influenced the legend, in the wonderfully eclectic and fascinating group of people it has introduced me to and in searching for it. The possible finding of it was relatively immaterial in a monetary sense. As solving a puzzle, however, that is another matter. What wasn’t immaterial was the shear fun and adventure.

If someone is looking for a mid-life crisis hunting the Dutchman is (for my money) one of the best, inside the mountains or out. Some people enjoy hiking for in and of itself, some go for the birds, the scenery, and such. When I climbed it was the goal of the summit that we went for. I am one who needs a goal, some reason to be “out there.” At one time it was hunting, but I have taken more to enjoying watching a covey of quail than shooting them. (But they were, for me, the most fun and challenging in the field.) For some strange and unknown reason it is now and probably will remain mines—and not just lost mines, but old mines, the associated mining history, ghost towns/sites, legends, the people, etc.

One last parting note: I am not anyone’s “hit man.” I research for my own reasons, my conclusions are my own and offered with some small hope of illuminating a bit of a tangled web for the next person. Nor does anyone tell me who my associates and friends can be. Jerry Hamrick tried years ago. It was a no go then—it has remained so and will remain so. Nor will I be “wolfing” things back and forth on the Internet. Just thought the Wiley letter should be shared.

TE Glover

 

[Matthew Roberts]

TEGlover,

Thanks for the "Wiley" letter,.......but,
You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble if you had gone back and reread the first couple posts of this thread.
The ONLY reason the name John Wiley (and Sons) came up was because YOU spelled Willey's name, "Wiley". That led me to believe YOU may have been talking about John Wiley and Sons and I pointed out to you that Willey and Wiley were two separate people. No one stated John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.
Here is what was said : "I believe we have two different people here. Are you saying John Wiley of Wiley and Sons wrote Ely's book ? That would make sense. Because the John C. Willey who worked at Morrow never wrote the Ely book, that would be news to Morrow & Co."

The whole exchange was instigated by trying to define who you were talking about.

I have the records from Harper Collins, the parent company of the former Wm. Morrow and Company and it's beyond clear John C. Willey did not ghost write Ely's book. After your book comes out I'll show you who did and why. Why the Treasurer of Morrow , John C. Willey, was tagged as the "editor" and none of the REAL editors at Morrow would touch the book with a ten foot pole. An interesting story and it took the better part of two years to get to the bottom of it. You are of course free to believe anything you want, it makes no difference whatsoever to me.

I'm glad to hear you're not anyone's "hit man". The thought of you sitting on someone's knee with their hand up your back was always repulsive to me. And I'm sure your friends, the ones you have left in the Dutch hunter community, are the ones you have always had the most in common with. I'm happy for you and looking forward to those books !

Matthew

 

[cactusjumper]

Matthew....Kraig,

I thought I was following this conversation fairly well until this:

"And I'm sure your friends, the ones you have left in the Dutch hunter community, are the ones you have always had the most in common with."

At this point, I'm confused as to whether you are talking about Dr. Glover or yourself. One thing I am sure about Thomas, is that he has never lied to me. In this day and age, that means a lot.

I could have sworn you posted about how it was the authors responsibility to check his/her sources. It seems to be gone now.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Nde Hatalii]

TEGlover,

Thanks for the "Wiley" letter,.......but,
You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble if you had gone back and reread the first couple posts of this thread.
The ONLY reason the name John Wiley (and Sons) came up was because YOU spelled Willey's name, "Wiley". That led me to believe YOU may have been talking about John Wiley and Sons and I pointed out to you that Willey and Wiley were two separate people. No one stated John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.
Here is what was said : "I believe we have two different people here. Are you saying John Wiley of Wiley and Sons wrote Ely's book ? That would make sense. Because the John C. Willey who worked at Morrow never wrote the Ely book, that would be news to Morrow & Co."

The whole exchange was instigated by trying to define who you were talking about.

I have the records from Harper Collins, the parent company of the former Wm. Morrow and Company and it's beyond clear John C. Willey did not ghost write Ely's book. After your book comes out I'll show you who did and why. Why the Treasurer of Morrow , John C. Willey, was tagged as the "editor" and none of the REAL editors at Morrow would touch the book with a ten foot pole. An interesting story and it took the better part of two years to get to the bottom of it. You are of course free to believe anything you want, it makes no difference whatsoever to me.

I'm glad to hear you're not anyone's "hit man". The thought of you sitting on someone's knee with their hand up your back was always repulsive to me. And I'm sure your friends, the ones you have left in the Dutch hunter community, are the ones you have always had the most in common with. I'm happy for you and looking forward to those books !

Matthew

From post #8 by you Matthew:

"These are two separate, different people, John C. Willey and John Wiley. NOT the same individual.

Yes I believe very much the John Wiley of Wiley and Sons may well have written/re-written Sim's Ely's book."

 

[Matthew Roberts]

Once again. I did not say in any post that John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

In answer and in an effort to try and get TEGlover to define why HE was spelling Willey's name Wiley as in John Wiley and sons, I said , "it made sense" and "they may well have written". Neither is a statement saying John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

Had I known Wiley and sons had written/rewritten Ely's book I would not have said , "may well have" I would have stated as a fact they did with no qualifications.

The whole exchange came about when TEGlover misspelled the name Willey either intentionally or unintentionally. I was merely trying to find out which it was.

Matthew

 

[cactusjumper]

Once again. I did not say in any post that John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

In answer and in an effort to try and get TEGlover to define why HE was spelling Willey's name Wiley as in John Wiley and sons, I said , "it made sense" and "they may well have written". Neither is a statement saying John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

Had I known Wiley and sons had written/rewritten Ely's book I would not have said , "may well have" I would have stated as a fact they did with no qualifications.

The whole exchange came about when TEGlover misspelled the name Willey either intentionally or unintentionally. I was merely trying to find out which it was.

Matthew

Kraig/Matthew,

Could you explain what you meant by the underlined and highlighted portion of the above post? Why would you want to imply that Dr. Glover might have intentionally misspelled Willey's name? Knowing Thomas, I would naturally assume any misspelling would have been unintentional.

I am out of this conversation.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Tnmountains]

Gentlemen:

I am not getting involved with this mess again. I had thought people deserved to know about the authorship of Sims Ely’s book, and the implications thereof. The scenario I have put forth is supported by the letters I have, e.g. the one I published on the forum. Further, it is acknowledged by the Ely family as what transpired. And it is supported by interviews Jerry Hamrick had with John C. Willey.

However, as there appeared to be some research that indicated otherwise, i.e., that John Wiley and Son were involved I wrote them asking if they had been. I laid out the Ely book was published by William Morrow and Co., that their officer John Willey was involved; however, statements had arisen suggesting that John Wiley and Sons Inc. was also involved with the Ely book. Their reply in total is below:

“May 1, 2014

Thank you for your letter of April 25 concerning the involvement of a John C. Wiley in the work “The Lost Dutchman Mine.” I think we can say with confidence that there is no association between John C. Wiley and [the] Wiley family or company.

If you have firther questions, please feel free to write to me again.

Sincerely,

John”

What agenda others may have is not my concern. My interest in the Dutchman has be multifaceted—focused on trying to understand its history, the history of the times and how that may have influenced the legend, in the wonderfully eclectic and fascinating group of people it has introduced me to and in searching for it. The possible finding of it was relatively immaterial in a monetary sense. As solving a puzzle, however, that is another matter. What wasn’t immaterial was the shear fun and adventure.

If someone is looking for a mid-life crisis hunting the Dutchman is (for my money) one of the best, inside the mountains or out. Some people enjoy hiking for in and of itself, some go for the birds, the scenery, and such. When I climbed it was the goal of the summit that we went for. I am one who needs a goal, some reason to be “out there.” At one time it was hunting, but I have taken more to enjoying watching a covey of quail than shooting them. (But they were, for me, the most fun and challenging in the field.) For some strange and unknown reason it is now and probably will remain mines—and not just lost mines, but old mines, the associated mining history, ghost towns/sites, legends, the people, etc.

One last parting note: I am not anyone’s “hit man.” I research for my own reasons, my conclusions are my own and offered with some small hope of illuminating a bit of a tangled web for the next person. Nor does anyone tell me who my associates and friends can be. Jerry Hamrick tried years ago. It was a no go then—it has remained so and will remain so. Nor will I be “wolfing” things back and forth on the Internet. Just thought the Wiley letter should be shared.

TE Glover

TEGlover you are the author of this thread and if you say you are done with it you may request that the thread be closed if it has served its purpose. Ask any moderator and we shall close it for you.
Thank you.

 

[Somero]

These are two separate, different people, John C. Willey and John Wiley. NOT the same individual.

Yes I believe very much the John Wiley of Wiley and Sons may well have written/re-written Sim's Ely's book.

But the John C. Willey who worked for Wm. Morrow & Co. had no hand in the books writing.



Thanks again for the informative reply.

Respectfully,

Matthew

Once again. I did not say in any post that John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

In answer and in an effort to try and get TEGlover to define why HE was spelling Willey's name Wiley as in John Wiley and sons, I said , "it made sense" and "they may well have written". Neither is a statement saying John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

Had I known Wiley and sons had written/rewritten Ely's book I would not have said , "may well have" I would have stated as a fact they did with no qualifications.

The whole exchange came about when TEGlover misspelled the name Willey either intentionally or unintentionally. I was merely trying to find out which it was.

Matthew

I believe TEGlover has proven it was unintentional with the statements below.

Matthew,

I don’t understand how you could be confused (tongue in cheek). Your preciseness on the spelling of the name caused me to review my initial post once again. What I found was I spelled the name with one “l” once (Wiley), with two “ll”s two or three times and – wait for it – with three “lll”s once in the last paragraph. What could go wrong? I went back and tried to correct it to the proper spelling of two “ll”s. If I missed any let me know. Good catch on the spelling – never thought of the other “Wiley.” Not even sure I knew about him.

In the letter cited above from William Morrow and Co. and in other documents the name is spelled with 2 “ll”s: Willey. Sorry about any confusion. The simple fact is spelling has never been one of my strong points – I sometimes seem to follow Thomas Jefferson’s “advice” or whatever: Those who spell words only one way lack imagination. (or something lie that) As my teachers, profs. and my wife can testify, in this respect I sometimes have too much imagination. For me spell checkers are most appreciated!! But they don’t catch everything – as a principal I once knew would say, "They won’t put the “r” back in “shirt.”


Happy hunting,

Thomas

So what is confusing, TEGlover corrected the spelling error that was unintentional and apologized for the confusion. Yet Mr Roberts clearly states "He believes" Wiley (with one L) wrote or rewrote the book and Willey (with 2 L's) had noting to do with it. Despite TEGlover providing proof to the contrary. As for Mr Roberts "believing", that would be implying based on his opinion, which everyone is entitled to, however without proof of facts it remains an opinion with all its implications.

Perhaps I missed something in them "Deep Dark Waters"

I do have one question..........Is this thread supposed to be "Bits and Pieces"? Just wondering since the "a" is next to the "s" on the keyboard, I'd hate for someone to think it was intentionally misspellllllled.

 

[Nde Hatalii]

Once again. I did not say in any post that John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

In answer and in an effort to try and get TEGlover to define why HE was spelling Willey's name Wiley as in John Wiley and sons, I said , "it made sense" and "they may well have written". Neither is a statement saying John Wiley and Sons wrote the Ely book.

Had I known Wiley and sons had written/rewritten Ely's book I would not have said , "may well have" I would have stated as a fact they did with no qualifications.

The whole exchange came about when TEGlover misspelled the name Willey either intentionally or unintentionally. I was merely trying to find out which it was.

Matthew

Many games with words being played in this subject.

What strikes me is why you would say "Yes I believe very much" that John Wiley may very well have written/rewritten Ely's book if you in fact didn't actually believe it. In fact a few posts later you state "After your book comes out I'll show you who did and why."

English is not my native language tho I have spent much time trying to learn it as well as I can. Maybe it is that I just don't understand the use of the words in the above comments.

Why so much secrecy surounding the writing of this book? Why not share here what you have discovered? Few facts are in front of us for this story. Im sure people would be excited to see new information.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

Nde Hatalii,

I don't believe anyone really cares about the story behind the Ely book and why there was such secrecy beginning with the Ely family and Wm. Morrow who conspired together to keep the co-authors name secret. The focus by the same old group is to misrepresent what is said, twist the interpretation to fit their agenda, argue, fight and attack. Nothing new.

Since English isn't your native language and you don't understand the use of the words in the comments, here is something you will understand and sums up my final feelings on the issue. Akoh. Go dakehego nohwich' 'i' hasdzih, akoh.

Matthew